Dueling Takes on Energy Cost Spikes from Mass Fiscal, Healey Admin

Image


  Dueling Takes on Energy Cost Spikes from Mass Fiscal,  Healey Admin

Monday morning, we received via email, a 'letter' from Mass Fiscal Alliance offering their explanation for the high energy costs hitting the state's consumers.  A couple hours later a message from the Healey Administration arrived, predicting even more dramatic costs when Trump Administration tariffs kick in, though without mentioning current cost spikes.  Both are presented, below.

From Mass. Fiscal Alliance:

Meet Martin Lowenthal [pictured in above screen shot]. Martin is a resident of Newton, MA who has been playing by the rules. He did everything state authorities suggested to prepare him for his energy needs in the future by installing solar panels on his roof, converting his home heating from oil to heat pumps, and switched out his old water heater.

Instead of savings, he got slammed with this month's massive spike in energy costs.

Hear Martin's Story By Clicking Here.

Martin’s story is all too common across New England in 2025. And as Massachusetts legislators continue to push costly green energy policies, the costs to consumers are bound to start going up.

The simple fact is that Massachusetts leaders are dismantling our state’s fossil fuel infrastructure, which guarantees affordable and reliable power when the region needs it, while simultaneously forcing residents to increase electrical consumption by mandating electrification of everything from home heating to automobiles. The costly and intermittent renewable energy solutions they’re pushing are simply not capable of filling in the gap between our increasing demand and the self-inflicted shortfall in our supply. That’s why your bill, as well as Martin’s, will continue to go up even more in the coming years.

As we’ve mentioned before, the Fiscal Alliance Foundation co-published a study in November taking a look at the green energy mandates being passed across New England and the effect they will have on residents within our shared power grid. The findings show that our electrical rates are set to double, over and above any increases that will occur due to inflation, by 2050 and blackouts will become commonplace unless we change course. You can read that study here: https://www.fiscalalliancefoundation.org/green-energy-mandates-will-double-electric-rates-cause-rolling-blackouts-in-region

The obvious solution to this price crunch is to take a step back and reassess our options. We are remarkably close to the largest shale-producing natural gas source in the country, and nuclear has come leaps and bounds from what it once was. The fact is, we will always need a consistent form of energy for our grid to reliably run on, even if supplemented by renewables. It would make sense to reconsider taking advantage of smart resources available for the ratepayers and the economic growth of our region. We pay the highest prices in the country for our energy and need to address this issue to stay competitive. It would also make sense to consider repealing laws already passed that result in current and future price increases.

If Massachusetts wants to reverse course, it needs to replace the green climate mandates with goals. These green climate mandates are what is driving regulators to pursue policies that are costing ratepayers so much. It’s time for Massachusetts lawmakers to put consumers first and reverse course before energy costs spiral further out of control. Rolling back these mandates and restoring affordable, reliable energy options isn’t just smart policy—it’s a necessity.

Regards,

Paul Gangi

Program Director

Fiscal Alliance Foundation

* * * * * *

Governor Maura Healey: Trump’s Tariffs Will Cause Gas Prices and Energy Bills to Skyrocket in Massachusetts 

Governor Maura Healey issued the following statement in response to reports that President Donald Trump intends to follow through with his plans to levy tariffs on Canada and Mexico on Tuesday.

“These tariffs were a bad deal last month, and they’re still a bad deal now. President Trump is putting a tax on energy, housing, groceries, cars, electronics, and appliances that we rely on – and we will all pay the price,” said Governor Maura Healey. “At a time when we should be working to lower energy costs, President Trump’s tariffs will cause gas and heating costs to skyrocket on Massachusetts residents and businesses. Donald Trump should be focused on making life easier and more affordable – not picking destructive fights with our allies and largest trading partners that raise costs on everyone. This is a lose-lose that we can’t afford.”

The impacts of tariffs on Canadian fuels include:

  • If President Trump implements a 25 percent tariff on petroleum and natural gas imports from Canada, the cost could be $910 million a year for Massachusetts consumers and over $2.5 billion for the New England region.
  • Most of the increased costs would be added to charges to gasoline and home heating oil, with Massachusetts customers paying over 20 cents per gallon in extra costs at the pump and for oil deliveries with a 25 percent tariff.
  • If President Trump implements a 10 percent tariff on petroleum and natural gas imports from Canada, the cost could be $370 million a year in Massachusetts alone and over $1 billion for the New England region.

[We asked the Governor's office if the impacts projected took account of the likelihood of other suppliers, domestic or foreign, offering alternative supplies at more competitive prices? We received the following response from an administration source 'on backgroun' -- in other words on condition of anonymity:

  • While the tariffs could lead to wholesale energy market changes with lower imports from Canada and higher imports from other regions, or changes in consumer behavior, modeling these dynamics was beyond the scope of this analysis.
  • We also assessed tariffs on historical electricity prices. If a 10-25% tariff was applied simply to the historical revenues received for these imports in 2023, this would add $38-96 million in additional costs.]
I'm interested
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive